What Happened to the Resurrected Saints?

Two short verses in Matthew raise perhaps the most serious questions that can be put to a literal interpretation of the resurrection stories. Matthew said that at the moment of Jesusʼ death “the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many” (Matthew 27:52-53). This is an account of a miracle unsurpassed anywhere else in the gospels. It makes the postresurrection appearing of Jesus “to above five hundred brethren at once” (1 Cor. 15:6) appear tame in comparison.

In this case, many saints were raised and appeared to many. Unlike the accounts of Jesus raising Lazarus or the synagogue rulerʼs daughter or Jesus himself being raised, this depicts saints dead for way over “three days” being raised. And, from the phrase, “they entered the holy city and appeared to many,” it is possible to infer that these many raised saints showed themselves to many who were not believers! Yet Josephus, who wrote a history of Jerusalem both prior to and after her fall, i.e., forty years after the death of Jesus, knew of Jesus but nothing of this raising of many and appearing to many. Of this greatest of all miracles, not a rumor appears in the works of Josephus or of any other ancient author. Surely at least one of the many raised out of those many emptied tombs was still alive just prior to Josephusʼs time, amazing many. Or at least many who had seen those many saints were still repeating the tale. Although people may have doubted that Jesus raised a few people while he was still alive and although “some doubted” Jesusʼ own resurrection (Matt. 28:17), who could fail to have been impressed by many risen saints appearing to many? How also could Peter have neglected to mention them in his Jerusalem speech a mere fifty days after they “appeared to many in the holy city”? Surely their appearance must have been foremost on everyoneʼs mind. So why didnʼt Paul mention such a thing in his letters, our earliest sources? Why did the women who visited the “empty tomb” on Sunday morning not take notice that many other tombs were likewise open? Why didnʼt the visitors to Jesusʼ tomb mention that they had met or seen many raised saints in that vicinity, meeting them on the way to Jesusʼ tomb or on the way back to town? Why did the apostles disbelieve the first reports of Jesusʼ resurrection when a mass exit from the tombs had accompanied his resurrection? Why didnʼt Matthew know how many raised saints there were? Why couldnʼt he name a single one or a single person to whom they had appeared? How did Matthew know that these saints had come out of their tombs? That would be more than anyone had seen in the case of Jesusʼ resurrection.

Letʼs look at the implications of some of these questions. According to the literal Greek in Matthew 27:50-53, the tombs were opened and the saints were “raised” at the instant of Jesusʼ death, but they entered the city over a day later! Apparently, neither Joseph of Arimathea nor Nicodemus, while burying Jesus (John. 19:38-40), chanced to marvel at all the opened graves and the raised saints in them waiting patiently for Sunday morning. The women in Matthewʼs account were likewise oblivious to the many graves lying opened by the earthquake and the saints supposedly just beginning to leave the cemetery for town the same morning the women were arriving. And the other gospels were silent on this major miracle involving many! Paul was silent on this matter in 1 Corinthians 15, where he discussed the resurrection at great length! Peter was silent on the matter in his speech recorded in Acts 2, delivered a mere 50 days after the many saints entered the city and appeared to many! Surely the “gift of tongues” would pale in miraculous significance compared to the “raising of the many who appeared to many.” Yet Peter said nothing about the latter. We are not talking about just the apostles, like Peter, being witnesses to just the resurrection of Jesus; we are talking about many people who had witnessed many saints being raised, and some of these “many” witnesses were surely present in the audience Peter preached to that morning. So why would he have had to speak at length to convince them that the resurrection of one man had happened? Having witnessed the resurrection of many, they would have readily accepted the claim that one man had been resurrected.

And what about the raised saints themselves? Wouldnʼt they have made terrific evangelists? But we donʼt read anything about that; instead, we have silence. We admit that to argue from silence is not equivalent to disproof; however, it is not the silence of extrabiblical sources that makes us doubt this account of multiple resurrections. It is the silence of other biblical authors that is generating our doubt.

A few extrabiblical sources did expand Matthewʼs tale of the many raised saints. These expansions were composed over one hundred years after Matthewʼs gospel was written. Remarkably, they even mentioned the names of some of the “many saints” raised, like Simeon and his sons, Adam and Eve, the patriarchs and prophets, etc., names that Matthew neglected to include. Of course, these expansions of the two extraordinary verses in Matthew and the list of names are found only in apocryphal gospels, which are full of all sorts of marvelous miracles that even surpass the ones attributed to Jesus in the four gospels that the church now endorses (like the story of the talking cross that followed Jesus out of his tomb in the Gospel of Peter).

Perhaps Matthew, like the authors of the apocryphal gospels, collected tales he had heard from other believers and/or composed gospel fictions. Perhaps when he composed those two short verses, he was only giving mythical form to the belief that “the resuscitation of the righteous was assigned to the first appearance of the Messiah, in accordance with the Jewish ideas” (D. F. Strauss, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined). He was also indulging in miracle enhancement: multiplying signs and wonders said to accompany Jesusʼ death and resurrection, i.e., Matthewʼs unique account of two earthquakes, one that opened the tombs of the many saints (at Jesusʼ death) and one that moved the stone to open Jesusʼ tomb (Easter morning). The other gospel writers remarkably neglected to mention that even one earthquake took place. That leaves Matthewʼs account on doubly shaky ground. Neither did Matthew use the most precise words to depict this wonder, because the verses state, literally, that the saints were raised at the time of Jesusʼ death and then lay around in their tombs for a day and a half before entering the city! That absurdity arises from what appears to be a sloppy interpolation of the phrase “after his resurrection”:

And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised: and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many (Matthew 27:50-53).

The verses make more sense without that phrase than with it. Without it, they would simply state that the raised saints immediately entered the city upon Jesusʼ death. But some Christian copyist, or perhaps the gospelʼs chief editor, felt obligated to add the phrase “after his resurrection” to ensure the priority of Jesusʼ resurrection, regardless of the literal consequences.

People who believe that many tombs were opened and that many saints appeared to many will of course have little trouble also believing that Jesus was resurrected. However, those of us who doubt the story of the many raised saints see in it a reflection of the kind of blind faith that made the story of Jesusʼ resurrection catch on in the first place.

23 comments:

Doubters you will always find. I takes faithto believe in Jesus. Without faith its impossible to please God. Those who come to God should believe He is ! You sound as if you have greater wisdom that the bible itself, and you know that is foolishness. A fool has says in his heart..'There is no God'.

I cannot speak for the author of this article, but I believe in God. He is YHVH; He spoke to Mose at the burning bush, creator of heaven and earth, savior of Israel. It is this sloppy "new testament" and the god which it describes that I don't believe.

It takes blind faith to believe absurdities. The author has enumerated point by point the ludicrous nature of the two verses. Which intelligent creator would expect the creatures he made in his image to be stupid and gullible?

Christians told who a few of those raised saints were in a FORGED Gospel of Nicodemus and Acts of Pilate:

"Joseph says: And why do you wonder that Jesus has risen? But it is wonderful that He has not risen alone, but that He has also raised many others of the dead who have appeared in Jerusalem to many.1930 And if you do not know the others, Symeon at least, who received Jesus, and his two sons whom He has raised up—them at least you know. For we buried them not long ago; but now their tombs are seen open and empty, and they are alive, and dwelling in Arimathæa. They therefore sent men, and they found their tombs open and empty. Joseph says: Let us go to Arimathæa and find them." http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vii.xiv.i.html

And Michael the archangel ordered us to walk across Jordan into a place rich and fertile, where there are many who rose again along with us for an evidence of the resurrection of Christ the Lord; because only three days were allowed to us who have risen from the dead to celebrate in Jerusalem the passover of the Lord, with our living relations, for an evidence of the resurrection of Christ the Lord: and we have been baptized in the holy river of Jordan, receiving each of us white robes. And after three days, when we had celebrated the passover of the Lord, all who rose again along with us were snatched up into the clouds, and taken across the Jordan, and were no longer seen by any one. But we were told to remain in the city of Arimathæa in prayers.http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vii.xvi.xi.html

We don't have to go back into history to find proof of God's being. We still get the miracles today. Questin: why does the Word Jesus insult so many people. Why do we not say prayer at football games anymore. There are so so many things in the bible that we cannot explain and just as many that we do not understand. Satan understands it all and will continue to try to ensure we keep looking through a smoky glass. How can anyone be against God or Jesus if they didn't exist. What are they afraid of - we know don't we.

Islamic militants and terrorists would not don suicide belts and blow themselves up in the most gruesome manner imaginable had they not a strong and abiding faith. Ah, but the difference, of course, is Christianity is real, and all the other religions past and present are deluded fantasies and their adherents gullible fools. So how do we discern the realness of Christianity? By historical veracity, right?! Uh, no. It requires the leap of faith. The same faith that convinces every proponent of any religion that his beliefs are correct and every other religion is wrong. Another thing that's really cool about Christianity is how it brings peace to a savage world! Colonialism, the Iraq war, Afghanistan, Viet Nam are just a few examples. Man, Jesus. You are rockin!

May this page be informed of the greatest Evidence that will prove that the religions had deceived humanity.

The real Jesus- descendant of King David, was NOT sent by God to be beaten for our sins but was punished by God with the floggings and beatings of men for his OWN wrongdoing- we did not know this because the apostles hid this truth from us by distorting the word of God in the Prophecy in the Old testament

Read this link:http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/greatestdeception-en.htm

Whether you choose to open your mind to accept the said Bible revelations in the said website or not is not important- what is important is that you were informed.Thank you.

They didn't say more about it because there were many many miracles that were not recorded or "all the books in the world wouldn't contain it" and it wasn't ESSENTIAL to the story of salvation. If you can't believe even though Christ was raised than you "would not believe even though one (or many) came back from the dead.Why he added AFTER was because he was showing that the listed events didn't occur at the same moment as Jesus arose; he was clarifying that the events covered the time period from Jesus' death through AFTER he arose. Why are people so dense? Jesus hid things in parables as well so as those that were not to know would not know. He knows whose dense and whose not and if you choose to be dense, so be it.

The answer is quite simple: this "tale" was inserted later in the Gospel of Matthew, thus corrupting it. Since, as you say, nothing like it occurs throughout the Gospels, and, indeed, throughout the rest of the bible, it lacks the necessary "two or three witnesses" to prove it reliable.

It is, as the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, a pagan fairytale, inserted later to impress "followers" (likely to extort money from them.)

They are the first fruits who follow Christ in heaven where ever He goes. ". These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb."

Revelation 14:4 "These are those who did not defile themselves with women," has its origin in the falsified book of Enoch,

Chapter 12 "...and lo! the Watchers 4 called me -Enoch the scribe- and said to me: 'Enoch, thou scribe of righteousness, go, declare to the Watchers of the heaven who have left the high heaven, the holy eternal place, and have defiled themselves with women, and have done as the children of earth do, and have taken unto themselves."

The book of Enoch was tossed out as a forgery.http://www.hiddenbible.com/enoch/online.html

I'd like to suggest that Revelation 4:14, “It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins” is not a reference to the book of Enoch but is mimicking Paul’s language in his letter to the church in Corinth. 2 Corinthians 11:2 “For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” I'm confident that Paul is writing to the church as a whole and not a group of women who are virgins. He is equating virginity with devotion, just as those who commit idolatry are sometimes called whores or harlots. I believe it is possible that John is also referring to idolatry in the Revelation passage.

I’d like to suggest that Revelation 14:4, “It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins” is not a reference to the book of Enoch but is mimicking Paul’s language in his letter to the church in Corinth. 2 Corinthians 11:2 “For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” I feel confident that Paul is writing to the church as a whole and not a group of women who are virgins. He is equating virginity with devotion, just as those who commit idolatry are sometimes called whores or harlots. It is possible that John is actually referencing idolatry.

Actually Paul does tell us what happened to the multitude of saints in Ephe 4:8. Paul says "He lead to captivity captive, and gave gifts to men." Jesus does not force anyone to do anything at all. The term captive doesn't mean a literal captive, they are obviously a willing participant. Paul is relating what happened to the people raised from the dead. Furthermore, in Revelation, John the Revelator sees "four and twenty elders sitting clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold." Revelation 5:8-10 opens to us that these 24 elders are redeemed, only the human race needed to be redeemed to God. Therefore they must be from among men, and they could not have been translated before the Cross of Calvary like Enoch was; for they say "you were slain" therefore it already happened. In the new testament there aren't that many examples of people taken to heaven, most of the saints must, like Christians today, wait for the second coming of Christ to join the the Saviour. When the "dead in Christ shall rise first," and "we which are alive shall be caught up together with them in the clouds." 1 Thess 4:16-18. It is possible that the 24 elders are a representation of those saints raised up to proclaim Christ's Gospel.

Too bad that Philo of Alexandria who was alive at the time also had nothing to say about it either. Oh, sure - he was a Jew but so were the supposed resurrected saints whom he would surely have found most interesting. Seriously - if such an army of zombies staggered into your city today, would that not be a topic of discussion for many years to come? The things people choose to believe are just as fascinating as the ones they choose to ignore.

For one thing, they were not zombies but resurrected people (of the 'first' resurrection) who would look normal. Among them would have been Daniel of whom it was said to him ("you will rise to your inheritance at the end of days"). They would have only appeared to people that were loyal to Jesus as that was the purpose of their resurrection.

Philo was a Jew and probably among the upper class (possibly Sanhedrin, as Josephus was also a Pharisee), who had a penchant for silencing (by threats of beatings or death) anyone that was linked to Jesus (as we also know the Jewish High Priests, Ananias and Caiaphas were guilty of handing Jesus over to death because they were jealous of his popularity (sound like political manipulation to anyone?).

If you read Josephus (War of the Jews) you will see there was an awful lot going on at the time with perpetual fighting; Jew vs Jew, Jew vs Roman.

I do have to wonder - were these Hebrew saints, in which case they'd never even heard of Jesus let alone worshipped him or Christian saints, in which case who were these Christians who were dead before Christianity was born?